On Wed 22 May at 11:33pm Earl of Lewess wrote:
The opinion polls have made it pretty clear: if you support Leave, vote for the Brexit Party; if you support Remain, vote LibDem (in this area, at least). It's a PR election, so the runners-up will also get an MEP if their share of the vote is big enough.
On Thu 23 May at 8:48am RussianRuble wrote:
A reasonable synopsis.
Another: if you believe in democracy, vote for the Brexit Party; if you don't, vote LibDem (in this area, at least). Although there are plenty of other options on the paper too.
The rest have a clear track record demonstrated over the past 3 years that they want to frustrate the exit process and go against the democratic will of the majority.
It's probably about time the LibDems took the "Dem" out of their party name.
Is a rebrand in order?
On Thu 23 May at 9:30am Sensible wrote:
The only parties that any responsible or honourable person can support today are the UK Independence Party and the Brexit Party, although my family and I know that the UK's participation in the elections today is illegal, as are all extensions agreed by foreign powers. Voting any other way makes you an enemy of the people, whose vote three years ago was clear and decisive. Enemies eventually face the cutting edge of public justice and are caused to pay for their deeds.
On Thu 23 May at 9:38am Tommy wrote:
@Russian Your synopsis moronic
On Thu 23 May at 10:17am RussianRuble wrote:
Is it? Because you don't agree?
Have you see the blue berets on Cliffe High Street shouting their expletive slogans?
Have they ever stopped to think what this says to the younger generation?
It's utterly pathetic.
They won't be forgiven for screwing future generations and implemeting tuition fees.
Still, some people will vote for them. Simple minds seem to forget quickly.
On Thu 23 May at 11:44am Tommy wrote:
Yes I don't agree that 'vot[ing] Lib Dem' is undemocratic. It is moronic reasoning come up by Brexiteers as they voted for people that had no power over the outcome of what they were proposing. You voted for ideals and are now upset that, like most aren't able to be delivered. But don't tell me that I'm undemocratic by voting (even if I am to vote for Lib Dem) for a party that doesn't represent your wishes. A democracy is power to the people. People change, Governments Change, Policies change. That is the beauty of a democracy. Deal with it. Your argument is the equivalent of me telling you that you're undemocratic by wanting to leave the EU as we voted in for it back in the 60s
On Thu 23 May at 11:53am RussianRuble wrote:
It's not though. The previous generation did not vote to join the EU as it didn't exist back then.
They voted for something completely different - an economic community. If that's all it was, the majority would not have voted to leave in 2016.
The EU is a failing project and the results on Sunday will show that it's not just the UK that are unhappy with it.
Anti-EU sentiment is growing across the continent.
People aren't fed up with Europe, they're fed up with the EU.
The libdems(and other remaniacs) seem to have got the 2 confused.
On Thu 23 May at 1:34pm Tommy wrote:
When you say the majority it was a slim majority with a lot of people voting to leave not really understanding what they were actually voting for and recanting shortly after. Similar to how Farage's, Boris' and Rees-Mogg's brexit options all disappeared.
You voted for a government who chose to join the EU. Just because we didn't have a referendum on it you still elected the people who formed it.
I for one don't care what happens anymore whether we leave or it all falls through. I just want something to happen. Anyway, we could argue all day down these rabbit holes so I'll return to my original point. Claiming voting for a party that doesn't support the outcome of the referendum is undemocratic is moronic.
On Thu 23 May at 1:57pm RussianRuble wrote:
I did not vote for a government to join the EU. I voted for a government to get us out of it. Both the main parties in 2017 said that they would honour the result and that we would leave on the 29th March. That did not happen.
A system, process, or decision that is undemocratic is one that is controlled or made by one person or a small number of people, rather than by the majority of the people.
What we are witnessing here is the unravelling of our democracy and the aim of the political parties to undo Brexit is an affront to that democracy.
You can pretend that this isn't the case all you like, but you cannot change the reality. The evidence and facts are plain for all to see. Some choose to conveniently ignore those facts.
On Thu 23 May at 2:24pm Tommy wrote:
The labour party also said they wouldn't introduce tuition fees or go to war in Iraq in the 00s.Thatcher told miners that their jobs would be unaffected back in the 80s. Pick any party in any era and you'll find them failing to upkeep their promises. This is nothing new.The only difference if we've got people with their heads in the sand wanting us to forge ahead even though what the supposed majority voted for has no resemblance of the current deal that is on the table.
On Thu 23 May at 3:40pm RussianRuble wrote:
The difference here is that this wasn't just a manifesto promise.
The electorate were asked explictly :
Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
There were 2 answers:
1) Remain a member of the European Union
2) Leave the European Union
The second option got the most votes and was therefore the will of the people.
It is completely different to the Iraq War, Tuition Fees, Miners rights or any other policy decision you care to cite as these are down to the majority vote in parliament.
The electorate did not have a say and could not vote for any of those things. They elected a member of parliament to represent their interests and would trust them to vote accordingly. (Granted this may not have happened for some - a bit like the years we had Norman Baker)
The 2016 referendum was a simple question and was answered very clearly.
Unfortunately we've got an unrepresentative majority of MPs who are remainers and don't want to leave. They've consistently tried to frustrate the process over the last 3 years and have cried foul at every turn.
This is more than unfortunate, it undemocratic.
Whether you like the outcome or not, supporting this undemocratic position is no better than the self-serving shower of MPs currently sitting in parliament.
On Thu 23 May at 4:13pm Tommy wrote:
You've also got a useless number of MPs who do want to leave. Dominic Raab for instance who resigned after he realised the importance of the Dover port.
Claiming things are 'undemocratic' seems to be the last defence for your Brexiteers. It was 'undemocratic' when the legality of the Leave Campaign was called into question (n.b. it was found illegal) and it is undemocratic now if I vote for anyone that opposes Brexit.
And the MPs that you voted for aren't self serving? Boris wanted to be prime minister, he's nearly there with his positioning from this. Mogg has made ~£7m out of it. How's that not self serving? Both of their constituencies have supposedly since changed their position on Brexit once the hood was pulled off what Leaving actually entails.
On Thu 23 May at 4:21pm RussianRuble wrote:
We've found something to agree on.
They are all a complete waste of tax payer's money - as is the stupid election we are having today.
The only party brave and honest enough to enact the will of the people has Brexit in it's name. That's why they will clean up today.
On Thu 23 May at 6:33pm Green Sleeves wrote:
Voted Lib Dems today.
I could never vote for a party thats sole purpose is to reduce co-operation with our closest friends and neighbours, let alone a party that is rammed with racists, fascists and nationalists - hence why the Brexit Party to me are a total no go zone. I'm sure they will do very well, given that UKIP are almost certainly a spent force so will mop up the angry Brexiters vote, while the more pro-EU parties (who also happen to possess actual policies) will split the rest, but I would be genuinely ashamed to be voting for a party based on a negative platform of lies and hate.
On Thu 23 May at 7:17pm Eighties Boy wrote:
Everyone I've asked today (15 people?) have voted Lib Dem. Mixed bag of folk.
On Fri 24 May at 8:02am RussianRuble wrote:
Ah, the rise of “illiberal liberalism”. Google it
It's unfortunate that political discussion has deteriorated into name-calling and that the insults most often come from the far left: "racist," "xenophobe", "sexist," "homophobe" etc.
Typical of left-liberal political argument to use such invective to dismiss other people’s beliefs and perspectives as if they don't deserve an argument and to redefine their arguments as extremism and bigotry.
You portray your view as superior and display a level of arrogance that is immediately dismissive of anything that contradicts your view.
Close-minded and uncivil, this characteristic betrays what's liberal in liberalism.
All too common and rather sad these days.
Some might even argue that the term “Lib Dems” is an oxymoron.
On Fri 24 May at 10:31am Eighties Boy wrote:
@RussianRuble - I was stating an observation, not an opinion.
I think you make a very good point.
On Fri 24 May at 10:54am RussianRuble wrote:
Don't worry, I wasn't having a pop at you.
It was also just an observation and something I felt needed to be challenged.
On Fri 24 May at 8:14pm Green Sleeves wrote:
I disagree, the far left are the least of our problems in society. Bigotry is a foundation of many views formed about topics such as multiculturalism and immigration. Of course it's probably tough to be considered as racist or xenophobic, but when you scapegoat people who aren't British for problems in society, what conclusions are we expected to draw? Intolerance is part of the motivation for brexit for many people who back it and many populist, right wing policies and ideology....it's not hard to grasp this fact. There are spectrums of bigotry, so when you are labelled as a racist, it probably doesn't equate to you being on the same level as the Ku Klux Klan or BNP....but you do share some hostile views towards the same groups of people who really aren't the issue in our country, and it's important that this is recognised.
It's time for many people in this country to self reflect on their outlook on life. We are all human beings and have more in common than what sets us apart, and perhaps that should be the first priority when you start judging people.
On Fri 24 May at 8:49pm Black Sleeves wrote:
Call yourself Green Mr Sleeves? V Disappointing.
On Fri 24 May at 11:05pm Tom Pain wrote:
Bigot-- a person who is intolerant of people holding different opinions. The dictionary has a different opinion than g.s. I suppose it must be bigoted.
On Sat 25 May at 9:17am RussianRuble wrote:
You won't be able to have an honest and reasoned dialogue with people who you disagree with if your immediate response to their view is labelling them a bigot, racist or extremist.
The "multiculturalism and immigration" topic you mention is a complicated subject and open debate is being stifled by the left as they think their view is right and therefore superior.
If you take that stance, people will different views will stop talking to you.
We're seeing this in wider society and it's causing a lot of people to withdraw. Our democracy is weaker because of it.
On Sat 25 May at 11:09am Green Sleeves wrote:
@tom pain, I am intolerant of intolerant people who discriminate against others due to the accident of where they or their parents happened to be born. I can accept that.
@rr it's not an immediate response, but I do find that when immigration and multiculturalism is discussed, it does tend to reveal a discriminatory side in many of those people. Some more than others of course, hence why there is a spectrum of bigotry, which we ALL sit on to a certain extent. The left doesn't stifle debate, the right are often just profoundly wrong and get upset/defensive when people call out their bad ideas. I get called "sjw", "libtard" etc etc all the time, but doesn't bother me.
On Sun 26 May at 8:11am RussianRuble wrote:
Treating introlerance with intolerance will not make us a more tolerant society.
I'd suggest a willingness to listen and therefore discuss complex issues like this will help get to the root of the problems we face today.
People getting on soap boxes saying "I'm right, you're wrong" is not helpful and is fuelling division.
Opening your mind from time to time might be a good idea, you never know, you might even win people over to your way of thinking.
Who knows, they might even change yours.
EU Election results out this evening - let's see what people think.
On Sun 26 May at 8:58am Sensible wrote:
Earliest preliminary check counts of Thursday's ballot papers published overseas show the country demands a full Brexit, and by the clearest majority. It can happen as early as Tuesday, now there is a second mandate from a public vote. Who would dare fail the British people now? Who wants to be remembered as a person who voted the wrong way? I cast my vote in ink, so that's one ballot paper at least that won't be erased and altered as so many must be, especially in inner cities.
On Sun 26 May at 9:00am Green Sleeves wrote:
RR, I've listened over and over again to intolerant right wing viewpoints over the years but they never become any more palatable or sensible. They are based on irrational fears and prejudices, and fuelled by an irresponsible media that wants to whip up more hate to sell more papers, get more clicks/views etc. I've tried my.absolute best to empathise and understand, but ultimately bad ideas won't suddenly become rational just because I hear them out time and time again. The onus is on them to be tolerant now, but I won't hold my breath.
The EU election results won't tell us anything we don't already know. A big chunk of society scapegoat the EU for this countries problems (because they believe in the likes of demagogues such as Farage), and even when we leave, they'll find something or someone else to blame because it's easy to blame outsiders. Trump, Farage and other reactionary populists sweeping across western democracies shows how divided we are, but can you really see these as great "statesman" who will be remembered positively in the history books? I can't, I just see them as opportunistic dunces who are playing with fire.
On Sun 26 May at 9:36am Green Sleeves wrote:
@sensible, so with this level of confidence from preliminary EU election results, you'll be sure to breeze a confirmatory public vote on our EU membership, so there is no harm in getting that final say on an issue of this magnitude and putting it to rest.
On Sun 26 May at 8:11pm Sensible wrote:
Given tonight's massive majority for the Brexit Party combined with the Conservative Party to be led by Mr. Johnson who will agree with Mr. Farage over the swift and decisive nature of our leaving the Common Market, preferably on Tuesday, any further opinion gathering would not only be a waste of money, but would also destroy democracy. Once again, those who call for a traditional, independent Britain have succeeded in a vote, the third such occasion on which the British public have decided this issue in a ballot that, excluding illegal voting and tampered ballots, has been almost unanimous. There will be a revolt if Mr. Farage's requirements are not obeyed to the letter. The electorate has this week decided to make Britain great again.
On Sun 26 May at 10:01pm zolo wrote:
I can’t work out if ‘sensible’ means what s/he says or is a troll. I can’t believe that any sensible person would spout such negative nonsense ( not just this post but all over the forum).
On Sun 26 May at 10:26pm Tom Pain wrote:
I wouldn't mind being in the common market but I don't like the EU super state, it's too totalitarian for my liking. Give those control freaks an inch and they just have to grab a mile. It looks as if they might destroy a cooperating Europe of independent states with their megalomaniac schemes. Britain doesn't have to be Great just independent.
On Sun 26 May at 10:43pm Sensible wrote:
I'll tell you how right I am. The Brexit Party has taken Lewes. Lewes officially supports the Brexit Party, which has won the Lewes count. Mr. Farage's leadership requiring a no-deal withdrawal immediately from the Common Market is the wish of the people of Lewes, let alone the rest of the country. I am correct, and look forward to taking back a traditional Britain on Tuesday.
On Mon 27 May at 9:35am RussianRuble wrote:
Nothing overly surprising by the results declared.
There is an unchanged section of the country that do not want Brexit and will do whatever they can to frustrate the process. The remain vote was split between the LibDems and Green Party.
The majority of the leave vote went to the Brexit Party and they have confirmed that they want a clean break. We didn't vote for a "deal" in 2016 and we confirmed that on Thursday.
Parliament would be very foolish to ignore that a second time.
We can now get on and document the "free trade arrangement" that is already in existence. There is no need for any other "deal making". We have a deal already - the political will needs to be focused to document it.
If they need to use the 2019 "EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement" as a template so be it.
Yes - the FREE TRADE AGREEMENT that came in to force on 1 February 2019!
On Mon 27 May at 9:51am Green Sleeves wrote:
@RR - I think you're being disingenuous to suggest the remain vote was split between just greens and lib dems. Yes, they stood on the most convincing remain platform, but most Labour votes in this specific election would have been by remainers (can you really imagine any WTO brexiter voting Labour in THIS election?!), and SNP and Change UK votes would also be remain votes, as would Plaid Cymru. Northern Ireland, Gilbraltar and Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain both in the referendum and emphatically in the EU Elections this week. Wales moved towards a narrow remain win as well overall, leaving just England wishing to leave on balance. The end of the Union is near, and sadly for brexiters, its not the Union they had in mind.
Its also rather depressing that the individual winning party is led by one of the countries most outspoken xenophobes in Nigel Farage. Still, at least Tommy Robinson was left £5k down up in the North East, and left tail between his legs.
On Mon 27 May at 10:00am RussianRuble wrote:
Depressing, yes wholeheartedly with you there.
There was no need for the Brexit Party to exist at all. It came about because parliament ignored the result of the 2016 referendum.
Let's hope the new PM will be a little smarter and realise you can't please all of the people all of the time.
The mandate is there. Get on with it.
On Mon 27 May at 10:16am Green Sleeves wrote:
There is no mandate, RR. Leaving the European Union has many faces, even Nigel Farage himself was discussing how the UK could follow the Norwegian relationship with the EU right before the 2016 ref.
The 2019 EU Elections in the UK show us that around 36% voted for a Leave vote (Brexit Party + UKIP votes) while more voted for either remain or parties who would back a second referendum (with an emphasis on backing remain in that vote). The small tory vote would perhaps swing the hard brexiters/leave-sympathisers back to an even keel. If you are so confident that the country wants to leave, then put forward a plan of what that looks like, and lets put it up for a final confirmation vote against remaining as EU members. The vote this time should also include younger people as was the case in the Scots ref, and should also involve EU citizens who have settled and living their lives in this country (and permitted to vote in other domestic and european elections). Why it didn't include these groups of people in the first place was a bit of a stitch up, as that would be potentially a couple of million votes, that would inevitably be warmer towards voting remain, but we would hate for it to be a fair election right?
On Mon 27 May at 1:19pm RussianRuble wrote:
There was a clear mandate. More than 50% of the electorate voted to leave when they were asked.
Because the minority didn't like the result does not mean that it was not a clear mandate.
The country voted to leave. End of. That is a fact and just because some people don't like it, that fact cannot be changed.
Our remainer parliament need to get over themselves and do what they were elected to do. i.e. Honour the result of the referendum.
If our elected representatives document our existing relationship as a free trade agreement - we've got a "deal".
The EU hardliners wanting a hard border with Ireland will then be satisfied (as we won't need one).
The problem to date is that our remainer negotiators haven't asked for this.
When they've been replaced with some competent negotiators and this is put to the EU, we'll have a "deal" in no time.